Writer takes issue with Roman history lesson
It is more than a bit curious that someone would produce 685 words of erroneous history, cheap sermonizing and unwarranted conclusions all for the purpose of telling the neighbors they’re ungrateful barbarians for being unwilling to swallow the medicine being shoved down their throats by an overbearing government. It is impossible to address all of the errors and falsehoods on display in this screed, but there are some particularly egregious points that need be addressed.
The idea that Roman dominion bestowed benefits to those areas under their sway that accrue to this day ignores the current dismal status of much of what was once the Roman Empire. Those states occupying what were the provinces of Pannonia, Illyria, Thracia, Greece, Anatolia, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Cyrenaica, Africa and Mauretania are hardly models of good government.
The idea that the Romans didn’t conquer “for the fun of it” is belied by the conquest of Britain – there was no foreseeable benefit to be gained from the undertaking and, beyond providing a base for the accession of the emperor Constantine, there was little gained.
The first American colonists – for the purpose of this discussion we can put aside those from Beringia – came from Spain and Portugal; those settling in North America came from France, Holland, England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland. The Irish immigration to the United States in the mid- to late-1800s was an effect of the Irish famine – in large part the result of the policies and practices of the English government – and settled mainly in the Northern part of the country.
Wages, living standards and levels of education in the Southern states, with their lower cost of living, lower taxes, and lower rates of crime, are comparable to those of the Northern states where they are not superior.